THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE. 142

said Margaret Langley, being interested not
only on her account as being connected with
my wife's family in manner before mentioned
but also on account of my wife's niece the
said Francis Margaret Buckland that the said
Margaret Langley should not compromise
herself.

That at the interview with the said Mar-
garet Langley on the said fourth day of Sep-
tember, I stated to her that I had seen that
she was subpœnaed as a witness in the said
cause of Schroder and Baker, that it was her
duty to answer all questions put to her, that
she replied "she would not answer and that
the Magistrates might send her to prison if
they liked," whereupon I remonstrated with
her and advised her to speak the truth,
that otherwise she might subject herself to a
severe cross-examination-that I had heard
her spoken of slightingly with regard to one
Walter Alzdorf, and that although I did not
believe the reports about her with reference
to him, yet they tended to affect her character
and reflect on her daughter, and that on ac-
count of both of them I was anxious she
should not make herself an object of public
scandal, and she the said Margaret Langley
expressed herself annoyed that none of her
friends had been to see her.

That before I left the said Margaret Langley
the said Caroline Mathews who had previously
been absent at my interview with the said
Margaret Langley, returned and after her re-
turn both the said Margaret Langley and
Caroline Mathews put several questions to me
relative to the case of the said Arthur Baker
then pending.

That I replied to one of the questions that
as far as the evidence then went I believed
Mr. Baker to be a guilty man, that I felt
exceedingly sorry for him, that it was bring-
ing great scandal on the Church, that his con-
duct had been anything but that of a Clergy-
man in mixing himself up with politics which
had necessarily made him many enemies, and
but for that the matter might probably have
been hushed up by his friends sending him
away quietly, and that it would be a lesson
to him for the future, or words to that effect.

That on the Monday the sixth day of Sep-
tember I called for the said Margaret Langley
to take her to the Resident Magistrate's
Court.

That I then told her I had heard from good
authority that she was cognizant of the main
fact on the day of its occurrence and cautioned
her to adhere strictly to the truth and not to
shew a leaning either to one party or the
other.

And I swear that I did not tell the said
Margaret Langley on the fourth day of Sep-
tember or at any other time to take warning
whatever she did not to give evidence in
favor of Mr. Baker, and that if she did she
would have awkward questions put to her
about Master Alzdorf.

And I also swear that I did not on the said
fourth day of September or at any other time
say to or in the presence of the said Margaret

Langley and Caroline Mathews or either of
them "Mr. Baker is sure to be convicted, he
should not have meddled with politics, if he
had been on our side we would have got him
through even if we had thought him guilty."

And lastly I swear that I did not say to
the said Margaret Langley and Caroline
Matthews or to either of them anything from
which it could possibly be inferred that the
Bench would be influenced in its judgment by
political feeling.

(Signed) C. J. PHARAZYN, J.P.

Sworn by the deponent
at Wellington, this
25th day of Septem-
ber,
1858.

Before me,
(Signed) Rовт. R. STRANG,
Registrar,

In the Supreme Court
of New Zealand for
the Southern District.

We, Margaret Langley of Wellington, in
the Province of Wellington and Colony of New
Zealand, housekeeper to Arthur Baker of Wel-
lington, aforesaid, clerk; and Caroline Mathews
of Wellington, aforesaid, domestic servant in the
employment of the said Arthur Baker, severally
make oath and say:

And first this deponent, Margaret Langley,
on her oath says:

1. I have read the affidavit of Charles
   Johnson Pharazyn filed in this Court on the
   twenty-fifth day of September instant, in the
   matter of the application of the said Arthur
   Baker. As to that part of such affidavit which
   says that "she (meaning this deponent) would
   not answer, and that the Magistrates might
   send her to prison if they liked," I swear that
   such words referred only to what the said
   Charles Johnson Pharazyn said to me about
   Walter Alzdorf-the said Charles Johnson
   Pharazyn said at his interview with me on the
   fourth day of September instant, " if you give
   evidence in Mr. Baker's favour, they will ask
   you awkward questions; that they asked impu-
   dent questions of Mary Schroder in the cross-
   examination and they would do so of her (this
   deponent) about Walter Alzdorf," or words to
   the like purport and effect this deponent then
   said, "If they ask impudent questions, I will
   not answer them, and they may send me if
   they like to prison; I go there to speak the
   truth, and I do not know whether what I can
   say will be favourable to Mr. Baker or the
   other side," or words to the like purport and
   effect.

2. And these deponents, Margaret Langley
   and Caroline Mathews severally make oath and
   say that on the fourth day of September in-
   stant, the said Charles Johnson Pharazyn came
   to the residence of the said Arthur Baker and
   entered at the back door into the kitchen in
   which these deponents were. He the said
   Charles Johnson Pharazyn addressed these de-
   ponents as follows, "Well! has the old parson
   cut his throat or hanged himself;" these depo-